Occupational Health and Safety Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Occupational Health and Safety - Essay Example There is no standard as to what elements or factors should be present for workplace or working conditions to be considered safe. The Contributory Negligence Doctrine puts the entire blame on the employee and frees the employer of any responsibility on the mishap that occurred. The relationship between the employers and the workers is one where their goals and the means of attaining them are segregated or are on totally opposite fields. There is no interdependence and cooperation in reaching a common goal. Employers are mainly concerned with production and are not involved in matters concerning the conditions and welfare of their workers or employees. This doctrine held on to the notion that employees are totally and solely responsible for their actions and management is a separate entity which is only accountable to itself and to the costs and profits of the business. Being a separate entity, employers are in no way part of the workers personal and individual concerns, even wile in the workplace or within the premises of the company structure, other than the giving of wage for service rendered. The basis of the relationship is only grounded on the exchange of services for wages. This doctrine's main assumption is that if employees, prior to their acceptance of the job or prior to the commencement of their duties, are aware of the hazards involved in the job or of the presence of hazards in the workplace then they have accepted these hazards as part of the employment conditions. They cannot therefore sue their employees in the event that an accident happens, because their acceptance of the job meant that they have accepted the hazards that go with it. The court based this doctrine on the theory that if an employee sees that there are hazards involved in the job before even accepting the work, he would demand for a higher wage because of the possibility of getting injured. The employer on the other hand, as a reaction to this demand, would either do something to remove the risk or would pay the additional salary. This doctrine reflects again a boxed relationship between the employee and employer where the concern lies in the exchange of service for money. The concern does not extend to the physical or emotional welfare of the employee while working for the company. There is no initiative on the part of the employer in providing safe conditions for the workers. The reaction of eliminating the risk factors is just a response to the issue of additional wage demanded by the worker. The basis of this reaction again is the financial standing of the company or the cost that they would have to incur. It is in no way to afford additional benefits to workers like safe working conditions. The burden of protecting oneself from work hazards is again on the shoulders of the workers. By demanding for additional compensation in exchange for a future possibility of an accident occurring while at work, the worker will free the employer of any liability. C. Fellow-Servant Doctrine The basic idea of this doctrine is that an employee cannot seek compensation from the employer for damages if the accident was caused, either entirely or in part, by a co-worker. This doctrine is regarded as an extension of the